General Discussion

of not just the Second Amendment, but the Constitution in general. Their thinking appears to be that anyone who feels aggrieved in any way can declare "tyranny," pick up a weapon, and tell the government to screw.

That was never the idea behind the right to bear arms. What's being sold is a seductive dream of personal empowerment that's understandable up to a point, but dangerously misguided.

A lot of people -- from various points of view -- feel they are not getting what they want or need or deserve from their government. The question is how to address that. We can vote, we can rally, we can protest. Or go to court and argue the law.

What we don't do is pick up a boatload of tactical gear and firearms and dare government to come and fight to death over whatever is bothering us. To do that, and then also expect the country to rise up and object if their threats of force are ever met with actual force, is essentially a call for the end of government itself. A government which a large percentage of the membership of these particular groups depend on heavily for subsidies, by the way.

Strip it all down and it's a strategy for claiming an unequal share of power in our democracy. And yes, I would completely agree that monied interests try to wield undue influence in the same way, with a different set of weapons.

Neither is an acceptable way to decide how we're going to do things.